Home
How's that for a slice of fried gold?
A peek into what's on my mind...for better or for worse...
"Congratulations America! You have now entered the era of Ahab" 
6th-Nov-2008 09:41 am
Jesus Saves!
This is from a blog by someone I knew in college (I purposefully did not include the link because I don't want the person harrassed by complete strangers...well, none via me anyway). I don't even have words to describe just how much I don't agree with what's written here (and I'm someone who still has a strong respect and regard for religion). To me, it's an example of why religion has no place in government (or more specifically, politics) and how twisted religion has gotten in American society today...I mean, where's God's love here (and naturally, it's an Old Testament comparison)? Where's Jesus' teachings reflected in this? For that matter, I think there's some serious fact checking needed...


Yesterday America voted for Barack Obama to become the next president of the United States. Along with Obama, the Democrats picked up several more seats in the Senate and the House of Representatives. In addition, there will likely be one to three vacancies on the Supreme Court during Obama's tenure.

The group of Democrats that are about to come to power are not moderates or "Reagan Democrats." Those who believed that the Democratic Party should be the champion of the working class, like John Kennedy, have been pushed aside. Today's Democratic leadership is much more liberal in almost every instance. You can see this when you look at the case of Joe Lieberman. Eight years ago he was the party's vice presidential nominee. Today, even though his views haven't changed, he is considered a traitor and was even invited to speak at the Republican National Convention. The true moderates have all been pushed out of leadership and mostly out of the party. The leaders of the today's congressional Democrats would never ask anybody what they could do for their government. But instead would definitely ask you what the government can do for you and then would give it to you! They want to make pretty much everything permissible and to have the government back you up in whatever you'd like to do. There is one place where they draw the line: God. Many of them believe that God should have no place in society and especially not in government.

In the Biblical book of First Kings there is a king of Israel named Ahab. You may have heard of his queen, Jezebel. Ahab and Jezebel worked very hard to remove God from the lives of the people of Israel. They permitted many upon many temples to be built for the god Baal. They themselves worshipped in these temples and encouraged the people to do so as well, thus turning the nation away from the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. Things did not go well for Israel during Ahab and Jezebel's rule.

While nobody is suggesting Baal worship, for some time now God has been slowly been marginalized in America. You can expect that His removal from our land will pick up speed in the years to come. I don't really know what Barack Obama thinks of God. He is a subscriber of Black Liberation Theology. Scholars of BLT believe Jesus's teachings were designed to liberate, but in an earthly sense instead of a more spiritual one. So it is unknown what President Obama will do with anti-God legislation that passes his desk. Will he veto it? Will he sign it?

For nearly two centuries God was a central figure in American life. In 1782, Congress declared "The Congress of the United States recommends and approves the Holy Bible for use in all schools." The motto "In God We Trust" began appearing on our currency during the Civil War. In 1954, the words "under God" were added to the Pledge of Allegiance.

Less than ten years later God began to fall out of favor with some Americans and they began to push for His removal from society. In 1963, the Supreme Court ruled in Abington School District v. Schempp that reading the Bible over a school's intercom system was unconstitutional. This was followed soon after with the abolishment of prayer in public schools. In 1980, the posting of the Ten Commandments in schools was also found to be unconstitutional. A state's right to require the teaching of the belief that God created the Earth along with the teaching of evolution was stuck down in 1987. While these decisions were all based in the schools, other God-centric aspects of American life have gone away as well. Nativity scenes can no longer be placed on the grounds of government builds. The Ten Commandments have also been removed from court buildings, even though most of our laws were derived from them. And there are numerous challenges to the motto and the pledge working their way through the court system.

God isn't being removed just from government buildings and teachings. A couple of years ago the nation's largest retailer, Wal-Mart, advertised Holiday Trees. These were, of course, pine trees that could be displayed and decorated. What was the difference between a "Holiday Tree" and a "Christmas Tree?" The word "Christmas." You see, some group was offended by the mention of "Christ," and so Wal-Mart thought it better to remove that offensive term than lose customers. Thankfully, the public outcry was such that "Christmas Trees" were again for sale at Wal-Mart soon thereafter. I wonder why some people are offended by "Christ?" Could it be that they know deep in their hearts that He is not happy with the lives they are leading?

Of course it isn't just God that is disappearing, it is the morals He gave His children. Just last week the U.S. Supreme Court heard a case about cussing on television. It seems that the networks would prefer not to be fined by the Federal Communications Commission whenever a "celebrity" utters an offensive word on live television during an awards show. This is just another example of how our society has allowed crassness to enter everyday life. When television was invented in the 1930s nobody would have even considered saying something nasty on a medium where children might be watching, everything on television was "G" rated. If the court sides with the networks on this one, you can bet that they'll be back in a few years asking to be allowed to have those types of things said at anytime, not just on "live" broadcasts. When Hugh Hefner launched Playboy magazine in 1953 with a naked Marilyn Monroe inside it was shocking to many Americans. Now almost every major movie actress has been seen topless by millions of Americans and very few people bat an eye. You can be sure that there will be a case sometime soon asking why a 17-year-old can attend an "R" rated movie, but can not be in one (in the nude). Some judge somewhere will surely drop the pornography age limit, and not just to 17 but probably 16. After all, if you can be allowed to drive a car, why shouldn't you be allowed to show your goods to earn money to buy a car?

Please understand that I am not suggesting that we become a puritan society. But for the sake of our children, shouldn't you need to be an adult before you are subjected to the less than innocent elements of life? I believe that you need to have some maturity before you are able to process certain ideas and suggested lifestyles.

Our society is becoming more and more permissive everyday, which the liberals are thrilled about. President Barack Obama will most certainly have the opportunity to change the make-up of the Supreme Court. With the new Democrats leading Congress he should have no problem nominating some very liberal individuals to the court, should he choose to do so. Partial-birth abortion is sure to be legal again before he leaves office. The death penalty may also be gone, even for mass murders and child rapists. With the combination of a liberal senator being promoted to the White House and very liberal congressional leaders setting the legislative agenda our nation is entering a new era, one not unlike that ruled by Ahab and Jezebel, where God and His ideals will be pushed toward the door.


Comments 
6th-Nov-2008 03:03 pm (UTC)
Scholars of BLT believe

Okay, I got that far and my brain ran into a church based on sandwiches. Mmmmm, bacoooooon.


But yeah, that's... scary. I am hoping that since, in the past eight years as Bush has brought out the, uh, very religious pro-US-only sentiment in a lot of people, that sort of the reverse happens with Obama and a lot of people can see, er... reason. Not that they give up religion or anything, but that they can realize that we've gone a bit extremist on things. ...If that makes sense. I'm half asleep, lol.
6th-Nov-2008 03:28 pm (UTC)
I think extremist followers for anything is potentially dangerous for any society.
6th-Nov-2008 11:14 pm (UTC)
Yup. =/
6th-Nov-2008 03:24 pm (UTC)
Partial-birth abortion is sure to be legal again before he leaves office. The death penalty may also be gone, even for mass murders and child rapists.

This is the kind of stuff that really drives me nuts. How is killing one person (fetus) not OK, but killing another person (murderer) is OK?

How, exactly, is the death penalty justice for a person who rapes a child? It's a reprehensible crime, certainly, but the child lives. How is killing a criminal that doesn't kill anybody even remotely OK?

What I love about these religious fanatics (and that's what they are, fanatics) is their hypocrisy.

Either killing is OK or it is not OK. Whether it's a fetus or a hardened criminal, life is either sacred or it is not sacred.

Just because you believe in God doesn't mean you get to decide whose life is worth living and whose isn't.

Grr.
6th-Nov-2008 04:18 pm (UTC)
This is the kind of stuff that really drives me nuts. How is killing one person (fetus) not OK, but killing another person (murderer) is OK?

Fetus= Innocent being.
Murderer= Not innocent being.

But I will keep a lookout for unborn babies with hatchets and chainsaws.

Either killing is OK or it is not OK. Whether it's a fetus or a hardened criminal, life is either sacred or it is not sacred.

Thank you, Hammurabi.

There are no absolutes in reasonable civilization. If we are able to categorize the severity of any crime (ie: petty larceny vs. grand larceny) murder, rape, and yes, even the sanctity of life itself are subject to gradation.

Just because you believe in God doesn't mean you get to decide whose life is worth living and whose isn't.

Tell that to the murderer's victims. I'm sure they'll be so relieved.

Once someone makes a conscious choice to take the life of another with malicious intent to kill, then they rescind the right to life themselves. It is a willful choice as far as I'm concerned. God hasn't the first thing to do with it.
6th-Nov-2008 07:05 pm (UTC)
Because a murderer decides when somebody dies, that makes it OK for the state to make the same decision?

You can belittle me all you like, that's not going to change my mind.

The original blogger is absolutely putting God in the picture - so whether or not God really has anything to do with it is beside the point. When you fall back on the "but God says" argument, that to me removes a lot of the wiggle room, if not all of it.

Jesus said "turn the other cheek". He even refused to strike back at the Roman soldiers that beat and tortured him, as well as interfering with his disciples' attempts to do the same (I think it was Thomas? but I'm a little weak on the details of this particular story).

If Jesus wouldn't kill, why is it OK for Christians - who have based their entire religion on his teachings - to kill?

I'm not as up on my New Testament as I used to be, but I don't recall there being a "Jesus said it's OK to kill these people, but not these other people" passage.

So IMO if you call yourself a Christian and you support the death penalty, that makes you a hypocrite. I'm not judging or saying that's wrong, because that person has to make those judgements on their own. I can't overlook the hypocrisy though.
7th-Nov-2008 02:57 am (UTC)
Because a murderer decides when somebody dies, that makes it OK for the state to make the same decision?

The state has to decide everything for the public it represents from the services it extends to the repercussions for the crimes it deems punishable (and the laws that make them crimes in the first place) That in itself doesn't have, and shouldn't have, anything to do with religion.

You can belittle me all you like, that's not going to change my mind.

Believe me, I wasn't trying to belittle you. The Hamurabbi reference was a snark, not an implication. Generally speaking, I prefer dialogues to name-calling. I was simply expressing my views on your comment as its own entity. I don't expect to change your mind on anything you believe, nor do I plan to change my viewpoint a jot. *shrugs*

Jesus said "turn the other cheek".

When wrong is done to you. But he also made a point of telling the Jews who were living under Roman rule that they were to do unto God what was to be done, and to Caesar what he expected as well. People are expected to abide by laws, and more specifically, to accept consequences for their own actions.

If Jesus wouldn't kill, why is it OK for Christians - who have based their entire religion on his teachings - to kill?

Jesus chose to live his life as a servant to those who were, in almost every way, far below him. His life was led as example, but you notice he wasn't jumping to his fellow criminals' rescue when they were given their crosses. That was their punishment- it was the law.

The thief next to him, he told he would see him in the Kingdom of Heaven. But he didn't for a second suggest he'd just pop him off the cross. Nope, he died right there next to him- because that was the law.

So IMO if you call yourself a Christian and you support the death penalty, that makes you a hypocrite.

Whereas I see this statement as being uninformed about Christianity. I don't for a second condone many Christians actions "in Christ's name", in fact I find a large amount of them to be distasteful at the least, and deplorable and reprehensible at best. Sadly, these are the people most openly represented- and as any Broadway director will tell you, one bad review does more damage than 20 good ones.

I love God. His fan club? For the most part not on my top ten list. It gets rather tiring to constantly explain myself and my personal faith to those who have been inundated with people who just like to be insane and then blame God for their idiocy.

To me, personally, there is God whom I strive to obey above all else, and government... who is there to watch over this world. I am answerable to both. The two are not interchangeable, and never should be. Nice big crowbar between them for me, thanks.

Bottom line: I don't see a dichotomy between the death penalty and following God. I can see where you, or anyone else, would find that difficult to perceive- and that's what makes us interesting. I have no desire to surround myself and my world with only those who agreed with me- I'd be bored very quickly.

So I apologize if you felt I was attacking, I was merely expressing.

Thanks for the exchange. :)
6th-Nov-2008 04:22 pm (UTC)
It's justice because a child rapist does something far worse than murder someone, they systematically prey on children, destroy their youth and innocence and ruin lives completely.

With death, at least there is a release from pain and suffering, with child rape, the suffering and pain lasts for a lifetime.

Time and time again it has been shown that many of these serial child molesters and rapists are pretty much addicts and cannot control their urges and cannot be reformed or rehabilitated. Sure you can lock them up in prison for the rest of their lives and spend thousands of dollars supporting and caring for someone who has destroyed lives, families, and futures.

What I find appalling is that our government supports, coddles, and protects these kinds of people while thousands of families, children, and the elderly get no medical care, no warm place to live, no clean clothes, no cable, and no three meals a day.

Murders and rapists get all these things for the rest of their lives... while the homeless little boy digging through the garbage gets a big fuck you by our government.

Bottom line is that these kinds of people, predators in every sense are no different than a rogue lion or bear that is on a rampage.

All life is connected and part of the world, and death and killing for the right reasons is a necessary part of life. Killing for food, clothing, or to protect the lives of yourself, your family, your society, and the world as a whole is justifiable. Whether it it to prevent overpopulation, or to get rid of a dangerous predator who is destroying lives.
6th-Nov-2008 07:11 pm (UTC)
With death, at least there is a release from pain and suffering, with child rape, the suffering and pain lasts for a lifetime.

It doesn't have to, and it doesn't for every victim.

Pain is an unavoidable aspect of life. Suffering is not.

Healing from a catastrophic traumatic event like being raped is not easy, but it's also not impossible.

You're right on that it's reprehensible that we spend millions, maybe billions of dollars every year feeding and sheltering criminals, yet allow children and elderly people to live, starving, on the streets of our cities. It's disgusting to think that somebody that raped my sister or murdered my mother or robbed my grandfather of his life savings gets 3 hots & a cot every day for the length of their prison sentence while my family has to deal with the after-effects of the crime.

That's how our society works though. The only thing we can do is try to change it.

Maybe if we had a little more compassion for the criminals, we could have a little more compassion for the homeless.
6th-Nov-2008 05:15 pm (UTC)
I have so many problems with this that I'm honestly not sure where to begin. And keep in mind that I am a Christian and work for the church. And perspectives like this are why i have a real problem in my day-to-day life because people lump me in with this crowd.

There is a ton of stuff I could pick apart here (the skewed look at the Jezebel/Ahab story, for one -- the fact that there is not one single mention of separation of church and state, for another). But I am honestly just too happy with what happened two nights ago to let these angry diatribes really get to me right now.

But I can't let this comment go: I wonder why some people are offended by "Christ?"

Gee, I don't know, could it be that not everybody in this freaking country believes in Christ?? Even if for one second we forget that we are supposed to be the melting pot -- I love how much Christian kindness and understanding being shown in this post. {sarcasm}

Okay, end rant.
7th-Nov-2008 03:01 am (UTC) - *poke*
Loves you bunches. *grin*

Gee, I don't know, could it be that not everybody in this freaking country believes in Christ??

We don't? Well hell, that's why those Krsnas were so pissed at me. And here I thought I was nice givin' em a haircut and all.
7th-Nov-2008 06:25 pm (UTC) - Re: *poke*
Heh. I know, it's hard to believe, right? :)

(from above)I don't see a dichotomy between the death penalty and following God.

Thanks for saying that. They really aren't the same thing...
6th-Nov-2008 07:35 pm (UTC)
Last I checked, and I've checked a lot, cussing wasn't a sin.
7th-Nov-2008 02:02 am (UTC)
Well, there's the cussing that's considered "Taking the Lord's name in vain," which merited its own commandment and all, but besides that, not so much.
7th-Nov-2008 04:17 am (UTC)
That is a very specific sin and has absolutely nothing to do with when you stub your toe and say "Shit!" or "Fuck!" in exclamation.
7th-Nov-2008 04:19 am (UTC)
Hence the "besides that, not so much."
9th-Nov-2008 01:10 pm (UTC)
Haha! Touchy subject!

I love the commandment about 'taking the Lord's name in vain' as that is a crazy, crazy law.

The best part is that the "LORD" in this case was the unpronounceable name of the Tetragrammaton(YHWH), the vowels removed so that the name could remain unpronounceably holy. The only people who knew the vowels and could pronounce the name were the high-end Levites.

Fast forward to "Today" where just saying "Jesus Christ" is considered 'Sacrilege'. The funny part is that if you open a door on Sunday morning and peer into any church, you'll see people half-heartedly singing songs with Jesus name in it. If they are not singing with their utmost energy, are they not taking the Lord's name in vain?

What about all those lame TV ministers that say Jesus all the time when they mean to say "money". I think they're taking the Lord's name in vain too.

So really, it's a funny commandment. Even funnier is the fact that Jesus, himself, broke the commandment(He broke several of the 10 commandments, because his whole message was that the old covenant is no longer valid and there are not 10 but 2 commandments... love God and love others).

Anyway, good thing I paid attention in Sunday School.


6th-Nov-2008 10:30 pm (UTC)
wacky to the extreme

the bottom line is fundamentalist and their ilk hate freedom

This page was loaded Jan 8th 2010, 3:58 pm GMT.